Stake (1995) writes that case study research is more of an art than a science. This is a poignant description of case study research as a methodology and Stake continues by writing about qualitative research in general as emphasizing “episodes of nuance, the sequentially of happenings in context, the wholeness of the individual” (p. xii).
However, Stake (1995) also points out that “the real business of case study is particularization, not generalization. We take a particular case and come to know it well, not primarily as to how it is different from others but what it is, what it does” (p. 8) and case study research is “not sampling research. We do not study a case primarily to understand other cases. Our first obligation is to understand this one case” (p. 4). This dichotomy, or rather this emphasis on the completeness of the case being researched without using the research to make broad generalizations is the heart of case study research. Researchers who employ this methodology should come to know their specific research and case intimately but should be cautious about using lessons from their research to draw similar conclusions about other cases.
Researchers who use case study as a primary methodology in their qualitative studies should also be aware, Stake (1995) points out, to what degree their own interpretations and experiences might leach into the study. Stake writes of the prominent and “ongoing interpretive roles of the research” (p. 43) and “its orientation away from cause and effect explanation and toward personal interpretation” by the researcher” (p. 43). If there is so much of the researcher’s perspective intermingled with the case being studied, how then can the research and the researcher be trusted? Stake points out that “researchers are encouraged to include their own personal perspectives in the interpretation. The way the case and the researcher interact is presumed unique and not necessarily reproducible for other cases and researchers. The quality and utility of the research is not based on its reproducibility but on whether or not the meanings generated, by the researcher or the reader, are valued. Thus, a personal valuing of the work is expected” (p. 135). This passage helps make sense of the fact that qualitative case study research implies that the researcher's own thoughts, values, feelings, and prejudices might interfere with the analysis of the research, but that it is expected, and to a great degree it is the reader's obligation to understand this and analyze the research with this connectedness in mind.
Despite this, the case study methodology can be extremely powerful as a research tool for understanding not just the research subject being studied, but for moving overall understanding forward. There can be a significant payoff through case study research. Stake (1995) writes of qualitative case study research that “new puzzles are produced more frequently than solutions to old ones. It’s contributions to disciplined science are slow and tendentious. The results pay off little in the advancement of social practice. The ethical risks are substantial. And the cost in time and money is high, very high” (p. 45). Still, the strength of case study research According to Stake, is that it provides “(1) the distinction between explanation and understanding as the purpose of inquiry; (2) the distinction between a personal and impersonal role for the researcher, and (3) a distinction between knowledge discovered and knowledge constructed” (p. 37).
Writing about the origins and history of case study methodology, Stake (1995) writes that “there is no single wellspring of qualitative research. Its history is extensive, drawing from the evolving curiosities of humankind over the centuries” (p. 35). When discussing further the evolution of the methodology, Stake uses an analogy from Runkle (1990) that likens researchers to fishermen casting nets to collect specimens. In this analogy, the case study researcher would take one minnow from the net to understand why that minnow works as a part of the whole. Not necessarily to understand why the whole works, that would be generalization that he already cautioned the reader against, but rather to better understand that specific minnow. A quantitative researcher might count the total number of minnows, understand the different types, and try to determine how different types interact with the whole. Case study researchers however would remain focused on the one minnow and also try to understand their own prejudices and history with minnows, with fish, with nets, and with the world, and how that might change their interpretation of what they see and analyze from that minnow.
Writing of Von Write (1971) and his contributions to the methodology, Stake (1995) discusses the differences between empathy and understanding then understanding and explanation that case study can help provide. Stake writes that “qualitative research tries to establish an empathetic understanding for the reader, through description, sometimes thick description, conveying to the reader what experience itself would convey” (p. 39). Finally, Stake points out that quantitative research grew from a need to find cause and effect through scientific inquiry and to “establish generalizations that hold over diverse situations” (p. 39) which is not the goal for qualitative case study.
Ultimately, Stake (1995) points out that the narratives from testimonies that case study research produces are used to “optimize the opportunity of the reader to gain an experiential understanding of the case” (p. 40). This idea of experience and experiential understanding is discussed later by Stake in terms of constructivism and constructionism, where constructivism is the learners ability to build understanding through experience and reflection, and constructionism is the manner by which learners construct their understanding of knowledge and reality through discourse and conversation. Stake writes, “human construction of knowledge appears to begin with sensory experience of external stimuli” (p. 100) then follows this with a discussion of how learners conceive reality: (a) through external realities and the interpretation of stimuli according to those external realities, (b) experiential reality or the way that learners experience situations, and (c) rational reality which is a “universe of integrated interpretations” by the learner. The ultimate aim of the research that case study works to discover is as Stake writes is not to discover the external realities but to help construct a better and clearer understanding of experiential realities, and a more sophisticated understanding of rational realities.
Stake (1995) brings up several roles that case study researchers can utilize as they perform their research. Among these is the researcher as: (a) teacher, (b) advocate, (c) evaluator, (d) biographer, and (e) interpreter. These different roles offer the researcher the opportunity to understand the research and the researcher’s relationship to the research and to the reader in different ways. These relationships are shown in Table 1 below.
In the research project that I am analyzing, PO fit for contractor organizations within the energy industry, the roles that I as a researcher take on are varied and not limited to just one of the roles shown in Table 1. The research intends to educate the energy industry on various aspects of and benefits of PO fit and values fit, act as an advocate for ensuring that values fit is utilized in hiring, and work as an interpreter of the data in terms of values fit and organizational usefulness. This is shown with rationale in Table 2.
The biggest takeaways from this reading in regards to this research on PO fit and on case studies in general, is the variety of data collection methods and the depth of understanding, to the study participants, that case study research can provide. While this study on PO fit utilizes only interviews, there are several other techniques and tools that could be utilized, according to Stake (1995) that could have been used to obtain a far deeper understanding of how the concept of PO fit affects the study participants and the organizations that they work for. These techniques and tools include: (a) observation, (b) description of the content, (c) interview, and (d) document review. Future case studies should explore a deeper use of the case study methodology to increase understanding of the participant's experiences through the case.
References
Runkel, P. J. (1990). Casting nets and testing specimens: Two grand methods of psychology. Praeger.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE Publications.
von Wright, G. H. (1971). Explanation and Understanding. Routledge and Kegan Paul.
No comments:
Post a Comment